I've studied nuclear weapons. I'm no physicist but I've read pretty extensively on the after-effects.
These people are fucking stupid
Do they address why they have smaller yields? Because targeting systems are much more advanced. That's it. That's the reason. It's like arguing it's better to be shot in the heart with a single round rather than blasted with buckshot in the center of the chest. You're still fucking dead.
I have a PhD in nuclear physics from a top 10 science guy university in the world, and I don't believe nuclear armageddon is a problem. And I'm also not interested in discussing it (just so that no one comes with bs talking points, I've seen enough). I'm just saying this so that you don't stumble on your own delusional bubble too much.
You don't believe in science. You believe in TV. You haven't read a single peer reviewed paper on the matter, let alone papers that have a different point of view. So spare me your condescending bullshit.
Now go ahead and downvote me so that you can sleep better at night after having excluded me, the infidel. Just remember that many people out there have degrees, educated and read 100 times on the matter than you and disagree with your delusions on the matter. Enjoy four faith in TV.
It's here, but it's been moderated and cleaned up a bit. I admit I baited the Very Mature and Very Important Scientist Doing Climate Denial Science for a while in it.
Is that the same self described particle physicist that claims to have credientials ready to show (that somehow have something to do with climate change authority while also saying ecology is not a real scientific field) but demands a wager under dubious win conditions in Le Bitcoin before showing any evidence?
I've studied nuclear weapons. I'm no physicist but I've read pretty extensively on the after-effects.
These people are fucking stupid
Do they address why they have smaller yields? Because targeting systems are much more advanced. That's it. That's the reason. It's like arguing it's better to be shot in the heart with a single round rather than blasted with buckshot in the center of the chest. You're still fucking dead.
I have a PhD in nuclear physics from a top 10 science guy university in the world, and I don't believe nuclear armageddon is a problem. And I'm also not interested in discussing it (just so that no one comes with bs talking points, I've seen enough). I'm just saying this so that you don't stumble on your own delusional bubble too much.
You don't believe in science. You believe in TV. You haven't read a single peer reviewed paper on the matter, let alone papers that have a different point of view. So spare me your condescending bullshit.
Now go ahead and downvote me so that you can sleep better at night after having excluded me, the infidel. Just remember that many people out there have degrees, educated and read 100 times on the matter than you and disagree with your delusions on the matter. Enjoy four faith in TV.
Your posting power is unmatched, comrade.
Is that a copypasta?
EDIT: Shit, it is. Worse, I saw the pasta being made, fresh, and lost track because there was so much of it.
deleted by creator
It's here, but it's been moderated and cleaned up a bit. I admit I baited the Very Mature and Very Important Scientist Doing Climate Denial Science for a while in it.
https://hexbear.net/post/355380?scrollToComments=false
deleted by creator
When the Very Mature Climate Denial Nuclear Scientist rages about "gifs" and uses boomer tier emojis to rage about them
babe wake up new site taglines just dropped
Me when the TV gods fail me:
Your post is totally useless and needlessly hostile.
It's a copy paste from another thread where someone says he has a phd in particle physics and says this about climate change
Is that the same self described particle physicist that claims to have credientials ready to show (that somehow have something to do with climate change authority while also saying ecology is not a real scientific field) but demands a wager under dubious win conditions in Le Bitcoin before showing any evidence?
Yeah
Science is about demanding thousands of dollars in internet funny money before presenting claimed credentials.
I simply wouldn't claim intimate knowledge of scientific consensus in a field I don't study extensively
deleted by creator